Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft: We've Been Killing PC Gaming
MCV has an article up discussing a new intitiative that Microsoft will be launching soon to re-establish the Windows PC as a gaming platform, ahead of the launch of Vista. From the article: "Microsoft has pledged to 'put the game back into Windows', admitting that its lack of investment in PC has been 'killing' the platform.
The firm has outlined to MCV details of an 18-month drive to establish Games For Windows as a platform with the credibility of PlayStation and Xbox, ahead of the launch of the Vista operating system."
Seeing as how Vista appears to be to XP what ME was to 98, I am not surprised that Microsoft is trying to hype Vista more.
Hoist Number One and Number Six.
Sort of.
Now we can expand this further by establishing easy to follow labels to show games for Windows, MAC, and even Linux.
While the sales may have been down 10% based on their numbers I do not believe it is because lack of effort. I think the numbers would be lower still if some of the more complex titles on PCs actually make it to game boxes. With the game boxes getting more powerful and support things other than games like email and movies it won't be long before some PC-only type game play moves too.
Game boxes can already save game states and that opens the door for RTS and TBS games. With a keyboard and mouse for email you could also support FPS and MMORPGs.
So while MS may think they will be helping improve PC base game sales it may only be in the short term as all their progress on game boxes are leading to a time when PCs aren't required and instead just another avenue for playing.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
When you find that a success in one sector of your business hurts another sector of your business.....
Monstar L
I'd like Mac and Linux to be worth the effort for game publishers!
I suspect Microsoft's war on OpenGL might have contributed a bit as well.
Is this plan B, in case the XBox 360 fizzles out?
Ok, just so this doesn't sound like a total troll, isn't DirectX set to be replaced by the "Windows Graphic Foundation" when Vista ships? How will this make the job easier for developers, seeing as they've been riding the DirectX bandwagon since Windows 98 (or before - I'm not sure when it started).
Or are the two really that similar that they won't be causing problems for game developers and hardware vendors?
The XBoX has been killing PC gaming. People are playing Halo instead of Counter-Strike. I remember when some people only had one argument against switching to Linux, and that was "there are no games". Well, thanks to MS that's no longer an issue. Personally I dual-boot, but my XP partition is very small and only contains Steam. It doesn't get very much use either, and probably wont anytime soon thanks to Advance Wars: DS.
Let's see if MS actually makes some quality PC games or just brings some XBoX 360 games over that will only run on Vista. I mean, for a gamer there is really no reason to upgrade to Vista. So MS has to go out and make one.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
"put the game back into Windows"
I keep my machine running well, so I don't get to play any of their classic games on my home PC anymore. Although whenever I'm visiting relatives I hop on their pc and play that built-in game of Spyware vs. Spyware.
Notwithstanding the efforts by various developers to have linux ports of their games, or the efforts of those trying to get Windows games to work on linux -- I simply wish developers would package both types of binaries on their game CDs. Granted there would be an awful lot of extra work to get two versions of games out there, but once big-time games get to linux, it will be all but over for the Windows Desktop.
It would be good for the developers anyway because they won't be paying out the nose to MS in dev tools, and they won't have to deal with Windows APIs that always get in the way.
Ok I know it's a wish for the impossible and maybe it doesn't make a lot of business sense for the devs. However, MS has proven that by ignoring the Windows game devs the past few years that they can't be trusted to help the PC gaming cause anyway. Especially not with a glorified marketing campaign like this.
PC gaming isn't dead yet, Jim, but it needs resusitated, and linux is the perfect platform to do that.
Sounds to me like M$ is setting itself up to be a direct competitor of itself.
Windows VS Xbox360.
A strange but inevitable scenario.
I think they were hoping to be in a better position in the console market by now, and that's why they are suddenly focusing on PC gaming. Well, that and the fact that they want to get their Trusted Computing platform on everyone's home PC and gaming is the only thing that will drive most people to adopt Vista until people buy a new PC.
The upside potential to be gained from Xbox far outweighs the upside potential from increased PC gaming.
This is a half-baked effort to make nice with the only segment of the hardware business that has legs. (Gamer's always demand the latest and greatest).
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Does this mean that I actually have to root for Microsoft now?
*sitting down in the shower, screaming in anguish*
The dirt! It won't come off!
Technoli
"And the publishing community is also throwing its weight behind the push, with the major publishers even redesigning their PC boxes to flag up Games for Windows in a similar way to console format branding. "
I imagine something along the lines of:
MS: I understand you want to have the words "Microsoft Windows" on your packaging.
Publisher: Well, yes, we've got to tell our market what platform the game runs on.
MS: Use "Games for Windows" or don't use "Windows" on your packaging at all. Have you met our litigation department?
Publisher: Well, since you put it so nicely...
Not to troll too much here, but to say the publishing industry is putting its weight behind the rebranding, without any more information... well, I get a little suspicious.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Lack of games for Linux is the only reason I'm still using Windows (2000, btw. I refuse to get XP).
Technoli
...when people say "literally" when they mean "figuratively" - the very opposite!
Circumcision is child abuse.
Who would have thought burning billions of dollars into a competing market might *gasp* negatively effect the PC?
Flight Sim 2006 will be released just in time for xmas.
"We're putting the 'game' back in Windows," explained group manager Chris Donohue.
Start with Halo 2 Jackasses. The loss of the first one for 3 yrs was a bitch. The second feels like its never coming.
"We're over the hump with Xbox 360 so now ready to build Windows as a platform."
What the hell was it before you started humping the 360?
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
I strongly agree, and I'll go even further. I'd suggest that he Xbox represents the way Microsoft can slowly but surely enter the hardware market.
As game consoles have become more powerful, they have become a more important target, perhaps even than the PC. Microsoft seems to be betting that if they control the software and the hardware, they'll not have any pesky problems of getting things like DRM into the PC chipset. Suddenly you'll find the next generation game machines with a keyboard, mouse, hard drive, removable media, and network card, all comparable to a low-end desktop PC (how close are they already?). When do you suppose we'll start seeing productivity applications (email, word processing, spreadsheet, etc.) for these so-called "gaming" platforms like Xbox? We know that most consumers already need only a mere fraction of what current PCs provide; they do want something that "just works" (think TiVo) and is moderately priced.
My suspicion has been, for quite some time, that Microsoft has very-long-term plans to abandon the OS as a product and focus entirely on what we now call "gaming" platforms.
This initiative is really about saving Windows. People aren't going to buy a new home PC in order to run the latest version of Microsoft Office, but they might if there are games they want and cannot mentally justify buying a games console, afterall a PC can do more than just play games, right? So when Jane buys that PC at Best Buy and a bunch of games (and Quicken of course), Microsoft gets its cut of the action via the copy of Windows that is preinstalled on the new PC.
Granted, PC sales these days don't compare to console sales, but MS needs to keep Windows in play. And if they do a good job with their XNA development platform, they can keep games coming from the PC to the Xbox 360. In a sense, Microsoft really needs to keep the PC out there as a viable game platform to farm new talent and properties. Games are also a strong hedge for them against defections to Macintosh or Linux for most PC users.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
Uh, no its hasn't. Please (anybody) provide some argument that explains how Microsoft providing a development tool (DirectX) has contributed to a drop in PC gaming.
+5000 insightful! You bring up a good point of which I hadn't thought about. There is a long list of such things that you could say the same about. In fact, I don't think it was a lack of hype at all that got them in that mess. Tell me again, who is going to benefit from 18 months of PC game hype?
Because game engines can usually be ported from one platform to another with opengl.
Do you know of any DirectX support in linux/bsd/os9/osx/any other OS other than windows?
It's hard to reconcile Microsofts statements about "saving" PC gaming with their statements about the future of DirectX.
Initially, Microsoft said that DirectX 9.1 would be the last major version of DirectX, and that it would be replaced by Windows Graphics Foundation (essentially putting app and game graphics development under the same umbrella).
But then they've recently announced that the WGF concept is dead, and there will be, in fact, DirectX 10.
Incredibly, they've further announced that DirectX 10 will not be backwards compatible with directx 7, 8, or even directx 9.1 !!! Apparently the legacy directx API will run in a software compatibility layer and/or emulation, which means that Directx 9.1 games will run slower after you install DirectX 10.
Now, the article is from the inquirer so it could be bogus, but I've read this other places as well. I'm hoping someone here can show that it *is* bogus and/or misquoted, because if it's true I fail to see how this is going to do anything but hasten the death of PC gaming regardless of what Microsoft's marketing department does.
Would you rather use GDI? Maybe the good ol' Microsoft Graphic Server? A graphic foundtion built on DirectX is a good thing.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
Course, if that $200 console didn't exist, that wouldn't be so much of a problem? The cost of PC's predates the XBox, not the other way around.
It wouldn't, but I'd like to think of it as a PC problem primarily.
1. Code is not optimized for your setup, its optimized for lots of setups.
2. PC construction has about 4x as much overhead as a console construction, even if you do it yourself. 20 different vendors, 5 different shipping companies, 10 different resellers who all want to tack on "for convienence".
Xbox360's probably get their stuff direct and save.
3. Licensing from games is supposed to make up for the price difference. Apparently its like the razor and blade trick. So we're forced to look at it like each game is a 10 dollar tax on the price break for the system. I'd love to believe this, except that still puts the damn thing below what you'd pay for a PC, with more graphical prowress.
the gaming industry first. Microsoft hasn't being killing PC gaming, the industry has. Lack of innovation, a sequel based mentality of game development, and the cross-platform release requirement imposed on most titles has screwed the industry. Remember when a group of ten guys could spend a year making a game that would keep you up for weeks, like X-Com? Or an independent developer could release a game like Intelligent Qube and still turn a profit? Now you have 60-100 people trying to make a pretty game that just fun enough for the first three levels, because that's all most of the market will play.
So what? How does that hurt PC Gaming, since ~99% of games are Windows only?
It's not that they provided a competing proprietary standard, but that they only provided a broken implementation of the open one.
With openGL Microsoft did basically the same thing they did/are doing with Java (they shipped a broken VM and then now are trying to replace Java with C#).
Microsoft only supports the very first version of the standard, which is from 1992. Most openGL applications require a newer version or extensions that are not present in the version that comes with windows. This paved the way nicely for DirectX which came out 3 years after openGL.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opengl#History
Would you rather use GDI? Maybe the good ol' Microsoft Graphic Server? A graphic foundtion built on DirectX is a good thing.
Maybe OpenGL because maybe I don't own a computer that runs Windows anymore?
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
So? Every game developer is completely capable of shipping their own version of OpenGL DLLs. Its usually a 300KB DLL. Where's the problem?
Don't the DLLs have to be customized for the video hardware?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Maybe an emulator for the Xbox/Xbox 360, allowing PC users to play Xbox games on their PC?
Friends help you move... Real friends help you move bodies...
#1 and #3 is definately true, although still just FOL of PC life aggravated by the XBox's existence.
#2 is generally true, although right now I'm trying out a cheap PC rig which might turn out cheaper than an XBox 360. Won't be as powerful, obviously, but still a decent gaming machine. WIll return with the review if it pans out. I'm installing UT2004 now.
Why in the world would Microsoft want to move gaming away form Windows and onto consoles? Consider that on the desktop (Windows), MS has a virtual monopoly. If more games are released for PC, that means more demand for desktops, which means more demand for Windows and all the other software they make.
On the console, otoh, MS is facing stiff competition, so by promoting console they're likely to be helping Sony as much as themselves. More console games implies more consoles, but not necessarily more XBox, due to several viable competitors.
Stifling the console market might also have less of an impact on MS than other console manufacturers, since MS already has an alternate non-console platform for games.
I was wondering when someone would point out the very large problem too...
Seems MS want the 'games for windows' to mean 'Games for Vista' so buy a new computer sucker...
Screw MS, and if the game develepors are that stupid to go along with it, screw them too..
Is it just me or are there like 5 of these stories every week? Does every self-important blogger feels like he's entitled to editorialize on the subject of how gaming is dying, or dead, or about to boom, or experience a renaissance, or experiencing the end of a renaissance? Seriously people, no one wants to read this for the 80th time.
...they're just starting to feel the pinch of transgaming, wine, Linux and a world that realizes we don't need them to have game.
Help us build a better map!
Solitaire II and Minesweeper: The Revenge!!!
Exclusively for MS Vista!
This is a sig. Deal with it.
Linux, in its current state, is absolutely _not_ the place for gaming. Mainly this is because of hardware support - it's not there yet.
It would seem a bit of a Catch-22, wouldn't it?
If we had better hardware support, we'd get better game support, because there would be a bigger market for high-end Linux games.
If we had better game support, we'd get better hardware support, because there would be a bigger market for Linux drivers.
Fortunately, there are other ways to get better game support. We're already seeing some: cross-platform libraries like OpenGL and SDL, support from a few big-name developers (UT2k3&4, NWN), and support from a handful of indie developers (Gish, Darwinia, etc.).
With a few "revolutionaries" to break into the Linux game market and prove that it exists, plus easy cross-platform tools, it's inevitable that we'll see increasing game support, and with it increasing hardware support.
There are also other ways to get hardware support: companies switching to Linux internally will need better hardware support, and will have the cash motive to make it happen. Even if the drivers aren't made open-source at first, the hardware companies will know that there is a demand for Linux drivers for their hardware.
With a few "revolutionaries" to stretch the Linux hardware market into the corporate sector, plus the momentum already behind general-use Linux adoption, it's inevitable that we'll see increasing hardware support, and with it increasing game support.
It's a two-front battle, and Linux is making headway on both.
But then they've recently announced that the WGF concept is dead, and there will be, in fact, DirectX 10.
Same concept, different name. There is probably some brand value left in the DirectX mark that Microsoft wants to keep.
Apparently the legacy directx API will run in a software compatibility layer and/or emulation, which means that Directx 9.1 games will run slower after you install DirectX 10.
Microsoft had to break away from the Win16 API sometime or other, and it did so with WOW, a library of "thunks" that implement Win16 in terms of Win32 calls. Likewise, DirectX Graphics <= 9.x will be implemented in terms of WGF^H^H^H DirectX Graphics 10, and all cards will finally get truly uniform support for OpenGL 1.x apps through Microsoft's new GL-to-DX10 library.
You just answered your own question.
PC gaming is hurting because ~99% of games are Windows only.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Not a problem, since nvidia and ati ship their own DLLs. I don't actually know that, but I'm guessing, since Doom 3 actually runs on Windows -- which it wouldn't, if MS had anything to say about it.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Cedega does this -- DirectX 9.1 implemented in terms of OpenGL. I guess this means that on Linux, Doom 3 will run faster than Half-Life 2, and on Windows, it'll be the other way around? (OpenGL implemented in terms of DirectX)
Anyway, it'll definitely be cool when I can say that all my old Windows DirectX games run at least as fast under Cedega as on Windows.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I still fail to see developing for DirectX and not OpenGL is huring the PC gaming market, considering that almost everyone who owns a computer is able to play DirectX games. Missing out on the everso tiny Mac/Linux market is, I'm sure, not hurting their profits is any serious way. In fact I'm willing to bet the cost to develop their games for multiple platforms would be significantly higher than the payoff.
In soviet russia, games play windows!
I think what they mean is "We're going to try to turn the PC into the DRM-infested device the XBOX is." I've been gaming on my PC quite well for years, and I dont need Microsoft's blessing to acomplish it.
To me this seems to imply that Vista may come with some API stuff that make it similar in programability to the XBox360. This is kind of exciting to me, personally, as the bridge between developing for PC games and console games needs to close the gap for many reasons. the most important one being independant developers.
Perhaps MS will now be known as the console manufacturer that has a nice programming interface, rather than Nintendo... Time will tell
Kent Simon Multitheft Auto
Whats with this MAC business? Its Mac, short for Macintosh. Unless you really do mean, MAC, the famous cosmetics company which seems a bit unlikely.
Again, so what? When 95% of computers run Windows
And a large chunk of that 95% are computers owned by businesses or the government, and aren't intended for games. Once you look at computers that are actually personal, that percentage is going to drop quite a bit.
Can you spell "incompetent"?
I think PC gaming is killing the alternate operating system market.
[20:36] wwwdot/.dotorg
This clearly smells like a precursor to Halo for PC with heavy DRM a la Steam.
Microsoft needs Windows games otherwise they're OS monopoly would be in jeopardy. How many people do you know when asking why they don't use OS X or Linux answer with "well, i can't play my games on [whatever OS]." Without games Windows will appear uncool and corporate. With Apple's switch to x86 Microsoft is at an even greater risk of losing they're monopoly on the desktop wars. Old games will be emulated and people will move on to OS X becuase it is "hipper" and easier to use.
I dread to think what would happen if they start paying attention to it.
Mod this guy up for a simple statement with so much truth. How many people are clinging to Windows simply because they either can't get their favorite games to work on Linux or don't have the knowledge/desire to try?
In your dreams.
Those were only necessary because DOS was so limited in terms of memory. Had it used a 32bit address space from the start (wishful thinking and impossible on the hardware of that time, I know), there would have been no 640kByte limit and no necessity for EMS and XMS.
C - the footgun of programming languages
It's worth noting, however, that you want to get your drivers directly from Nvidia or ATI, and not anything provided by Microsoft. I haven't checked this out in a while (since I use a Mac these days), but it used to be that OpenGL wasn't really supported by the Nvidia drivers provided through Windows Update. From what I can tell, Microsoft took Nvidia's release and actively removed some level of OpenGL support.
In your dreams.
Well, far be it from me to inject some reality, facts, or common sense into your fanboyism.